Blog
About

63
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    8
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      A phase 3 trial of pirfenidone in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.

      The New England journal of medicine

      drug effects, Vital Capacity, Treatment Outcome, therapeutic use, adverse effects, Pyridones, Middle Aged, Male, physiopathology, mortality, drug therapy, Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis, Humans, Female, administration & dosage, Enzyme Inhibitors, Double-Blind Method, Disease Progression, Antifibrinolytic Agents, Aged, 80 and over, Aged, Adult, Administration, Oral

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          In two of three phase 3 trials, pirfenidone, an oral antifibrotic therapy, reduced disease progression, as measured by the decline in forced vital capacity (FVC) or vital capacity, in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis; in the third trial, this end point was not achieved. We sought to confirm the beneficial effect of pirfenidone on disease progression in such patients. In this phase 3 study, we randomly assigned 555 patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis to receive either oral pirfenidone (2403 mg per day) or placebo for 52 weeks. The primary end point was the change in FVC or death at week 52. Secondary end points were the 6-minute walk distance, progression-free survival, dyspnea, and death from any cause or from idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. In the pirfenidone group, as compared with the placebo group, there was a relative reduction of 47.9% in the proportion of patients who had an absolute decline of 10 percentage points or more in the percentage of the predicted FVC or who died; there was also a relative increase of 132.5% in the proportion of patients with no decline in FVC (P<0.001). Pirfenidone reduced the decline in the 6-minute walk distance (P=0.04) and improved progression-free survival (P<0.001). There was no significant between-group difference in dyspnea scores (P=0.16) or in rates of death from any cause (P=0.10) or from idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (P=0.23). However, in a prespecified pooled analysis incorporating results from two previous phase 3 trials, the between-group difference favoring pirfenidone was significant for death from any cause (P=0.01) and from idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (P=0.006). Gastrointestinal and skin-related adverse events were more common in the pirfenidone group than in the placebo group but rarely led to treatment discontinuation. Pirfenidone, as compared with placebo, reduced disease progression, as reflected by lung function, exercise tolerance, and progression-free survival, in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Treatment was associated with an acceptable side-effect profile and fewer deaths. (Funded by InterMune; ASCEND ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01366209.).

          Related collections

          Most cited references 25

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Standardisation of spirometry.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            An official ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT statement: idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: evidence-based guidelines for diagnosis and management.

            This document is an international evidence-based guideline on the diagnosis and management of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, and is a collaborative effort of the American Thoracic Society, the European Respiratory Society, the Japanese Respiratory Society, and the Latin American Thoracic Association. It represents the current state of knowledge regarding idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), and contains sections on definition and epidemiology, risk factors, diagnosis, natural history, staging and prognosis, treatment, and monitoring disease course. For the diagnosis and treatment sections, pragmatic GRADE evidence-based methodology was applied in a question-based format. For each diagnosis and treatment question, the committee graded the quality of the evidence available (high, moderate, low, or very low), and made a recommendation (yes or no, strong or weak). Recommendations were based on majority vote. It is emphasized that clinicians must spend adequate time with patients to discuss patients' values and preferences and decide on the appropriate course of action.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              A sharper Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                10.1056/NEJMoa1402582
                24836312

                Comments

                Comment on this article